Theos-Talk Archives (July 2003 Message tt00163)

Hi Katinka and all of you,

Thanks for your friendly answer.

My views are:

If you need more clarity, I will suggest, that you again run through the
previous emails and the content of the links and quotes connected with the
emails I have posted in response to your questions..
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/12485
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/12487
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/12551
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/12570 (july 2003)

Different groups of Seekers do not need to be taught in the manner
Krishnamurti did
around the years 1929-1938 - when he PUBLICLY announced that there was NO
Masters, NO Path to follow, NO Teachers, NO Authorities for the
beginner-seekers to lean on if in need. And some of them need it.

He was at that time claimed to be a World Teacher - and he sort of 'killed'
what a great number of followers had learned through Theosophy - and barred
their spiritual progress.
This was bad. But as the link says
(http://www.alpheus.org/html/source_materials/krishnamurti/truth_about_k.htm
l )
- he did it because of ignorance. But he was responsible - because the made
lectures - even if he said he was no authority !
And he - as far as I understand - made lectures to a number of seekers,
which was coming to his lecture-meetings having quite free access to them.

Did this help ?

But, as I have said I don't know everything. But the above are to me at
least clearly the truth.



from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Katinka Hesselink" <mail@katinkahesselink.net>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 1:39 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: (krishnamurti and the white brotherhood)


> Hi,
>
> I still don't think you present your case very well. What precisely
> was his negative effect? As for
>
> > His teaching from the mentioned timeperiod was only suited for his
> > followers. And even today some of his followers aught to do
> something else -
> > so to learn MORE THAN ONE mode of teaching.
> Precisely the fact that he did NOT claim to be an authority, makes it
> quite easy for his followers to study other material. They are left
> quite free to do so.
>
> Then again, you haven't quite read what I wrote. You say:
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
> theosophy@a...> wrote:
> > He called the Masters of Theosophy an "illusion" publicly, but
> privately
> > accepted their
> > existence - or at least, what HE called his Masters. (Was this
> good ? I will
> > question that.)
> It was I who put the name "masters" on the "Them" who he said
> protected him and helped him keep his system clean. He did not use
> the word masters that much.
>
> Katinka
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>